General Proposal · Proposed / Non-Authoritative
Direction Level · Single-file HTML HDO variance

T104-PH001-AC005-CHECK000 commissioning decision proposal

Five pending decisions on internal Detail depth and labelled rich media, one-file AD/GD lane boundaries with an inclusion threshold, concrete content roles, the grounding Analysis as sole content feed, and the interim carrier treatment of task issue #326 for general_proposal.

Checkpoint
T104-PH001-AC005-CHECK000
Review cycle
Reference-navigation + scannability recycle on v0.5.0 baseline
Version
v0.8.0
Date
2026-07-13
Status
Draft · pending CHECK000 disposition
Decision owner
HITL (HDO)
Producer
HITL cycle · Opus (bounded)
Authority boundary. This file claims no disposition or execution authority and creates no normative authority; it is itself a general_proposal family dogfood fed solely by the frozen grounding Analysis v2.1.0. Selections and notes are non-persisting routed input that the HDO may copy out for Consultant scribing. Disposition happens only through the P-STD-008-CLAUSE-005A four-leg bundle on commissioning PR #493; this file, its recommendations, and its payload do not substitute for that record.
Architecture decisions · AD0 / 4 dispositioned
Governance decisions · GD0 / 1 dispositioned
1
Orientation
What is being decided

The HDO is reviewing five pending decisions in two independent lanes. Decisions 1–4 form the Architecture lane for internal Detail depth, one-file AD/GD lanes, content roles, and the grounding-Analysis content model. Decision 5 forms the Governance lane for the issue #326 carrier treatment. Nothing is pre-approved, and no GD state implies an AD state or vice versa.

Architecture lane · 0 / 4
Decisions 1–4
Internal Detail + labelled rich media · one-file AD/GD lanes · three content roles · grounding Analysis as sole feed
Governance lane · 0 / 1
Decision 5
Amend #326 in place (5A-interim) · retire #326 as absorbed-unexecuted
2
Grounded constraints
What the SSOT establishes

Established. The sole SSOT content feed is the frozen grounding Analysis v2.1.0 (SHA-256 60327f53…1b1ab8356), especially §III–§IV. The statements below are constraints and recorded lineage, not dispositions.

Analysis v2.1.0

Standards, PRD, and SPS

  • T104-STD-005 keeps proposal_level=detail reserved-inactive; sps_T104C §xi defines Detail as supporting evidence/tradeoff/constraint beneath an Option, and Decision as a reviewable question inside a Direction.
  • Proposal content stays non-authoritative until governing disposition and later promotion; an Analysis feeds but never replaces a Proposal (proposal_analysis).
  • Legacy subtype PRD #98 stays open until an accepted successor exists.

Lineage · compared landscape

  • Parent PLAN #325 remains the detailed GitHub activity authority; issue #326 still carries the earlier diagnostic/detail-depth contract and stays untouched while CHECK000 is pending.
  • The HDO-selected Option-C endgame replaced the earlier three-route carrier comparison with a bounded 5A-interim versus retire-absorbed choice for #326.
  • Family dogfood (AC008 skeleton, both T101 siblings) is qualitative, non-authoritative evidence; proposal-family mechanics route to AC007/#500, with AC008/#501 and AC009/#502 gated on AC007 and #449/#450 as normative-encoding dependencies.
3
Prompt-specific judgment
What remains Consultant synthesis

Recommendations 1A–4A

Recommended. 1A richer internal Detail plus labelled rich media; 2A one file with thresholded, asymmetric AD/GD lanes; 3A three labelled content roles including rich media; 4A the grounding Analysis as the sole SSOT feed with the HTML as HDO surface. Full reasoning sits in each card below.

Decision 5 · honest tension

5A-interim remains recommended: after a conforming CHECK000 approval, amending #326 in place carries the bounded interim slice with the lowest churn and a P-STD-008-CLAUSE-008D changelog trail. retire-absorbed closes #326 as absorbed-unexecuted. The card states only the choice and its consequence; only the HDO adjudicates the weight.

Analysis v2.1.0 AC007 · #500 Provenance
4
Carrier-route comparison
#326 carrier treatment · Decision 5
Criterion5A-interim · amend #326 in placeretire-absorbed · close #326 as absorbed-unexecuted
Carrier treatmentAmend #326 in place after a conforming CHECK000 approvalClose #326 as absorbed-unexecuted; normalization moves to AC007/#500
P-STD-008-CLAUSE-008D trailBody edit plus a durable what/why changelog commentPointer comment to AC007/#500; no in-place changelog trail on #326
Churn / continuityLowest churn; strongest continuity of the changelog trailMore disposition churn on #326; defers normalization to AC007
#326 action timingNo #326 action before a conforming CHECK000 approvalNo #326 action before a conforming CHECK000 approval
Consultant posture: 5A-interim is recommended, but this is not a numeric winner or a pre-disposition. retire-absorbed remains a conforming HDO choice with a different lineage cost. The D5 card states only the choice and its consequence, not #326’s future contract, and no issue is amended, retired, or executed by this HTML.
5
Architecture decision lane · AD
Detail-depth and proposal-card dispositions

Four independent, pending architecture decisions. The green recommendation treatment and ✅ identify the Consultant recommendation only; no disposition state is pre-filled.

Filter

Architecture lane · AD

Detail-depth mechanics · 4 pending decisions

D1Internal Detail depth and rich-media guidancePending
Should Detail-depth enrich internal Detail content and labelled rich media, or activate reserved proposal_level=detail?

Recommendation

✅ 1A · Richer internal Detail plus labelled rich-media guidance. Allow richer technical support — labelled diagrams, tables, schemas, or code-shaped examples — inside internal Details without activating reserved proposal_level=detail.

Why

  • T104-STD-005 keeps proposal_level=detail reserved-inactive; sps_T104C §xi already defines Detail as supporting content beneath an Option.
  • Rich media explains an Option; it does not acquire authority through visual concreteness.
  • Active proposal levels stay at direction and architecture.

Options and consequence deltas

1B · Activate proposal_level=detail. Treat richer depth as a request to make detail an authorable proposal altitude. If chosen instead, ordinary carry-forward stops until the proper PRD/standard authority activates the reserved value.

1C · Leave depth ad hoc. Avoid mechanics changes and rely on author judgment. If chosen instead, internal-depth and rich-media guidance stays unresolved and consistency stays unenforceable.

Downstream impact · High

  • AC007 and later proposal guidance/template wording can define richer internal Detail and labelled rich media.
  • proposal_level=detail remains inactive.
  • Any P-STD-005 impact routes later rather than being edited here.

Related material

T104C · design spec AC007 · #500
Established vocabulary · Consultant 1A synthesis
Non-authoritative illustrative Detail · bounded internal depth

Illustration only. A Detail may carry labelled edge conditions, affected fields, failure behavior, or a small diagram/schema beneath an Option. This is not implementation text and does not create a proposal altitude.

detail: { depth: bounded, media: labelled, supports_option: true, authority: none }
Evidence boundary
The AC008 golden skeleton and both T101 siblings use labelled collapsible Detail/evidence disclosures, showing bounded rich Detail is workable; that sibling dogfood is qualitative and non-authoritative for AC005.
D2One-file AD/GD lanes, inclusion threshold, and asymmetric depthPending
When may one general_proposal file carry both architecture and governance lanes, and how deep should each lane’s cards go?

Recommendation

✅ 2A · One file, both lanes, thresholded and asymmetric. One CHECK000 file may carry independently dispositionable AD and GD lanes that share a proposal subject.

Why

  • A governance question earns a GD card only when non-routine, consequential, and requiring an explicit HDO choice with material downstream implications.
  • AD cards carry full reasoning depth and may include labelled visual/Detail exhibits; GD cards stay compact — question, options, consequence delta, controls, and notes.
  • One proposal file carries one coherent subject (T104C-CON-006); DRC controls operate per Decision, and governance needing no HDO choice stays evidence or recorded payload.

Options and consequence deltas

2B · Symmetric full depth in both lanes. Drop the compact-GD rule and give GD cards the same depth and Detail exhibits as AD. If chosen instead, process-heavy GD content can obscure the architecture decisions and expand the file toward a control ledger.

2C · No inclusion threshold. Give every governance touchpoint its own GD card regardless of consequence. If chosen instead, routine governance duplicates its owning surfaces and general_proposal drifts into a catch-all record.

Downstream impact · High

  • AC007 owns the research and full mechanics for the threshold and asymmetric-depth rule.
  • AC005 carries only interim direction.
  • AC008 and AC009 stay gated on AC007 controls.

Related material

AC007 · #500 AC008 · #501 AC009 · #502
Lane-coexistence direction · Consultant 2A synthesis
Evidence boundary
AC008 and both T101 siblings show one CHECK000 file can host independent AD and GD lanes without one lane authorizing the other; they establish coexistence, not the new threshold or compact-GD rule — several existing GD cards still carry rich Detail. It does not pre-approve this choice.
D3Detail, Example, and Proposed carry-forward rolesPending
How should concrete material remain useful to the HDO without being mistaken for approved execution authority?

Recommendation

✅ 3A · Three distinct labelled roles, including for rich media. Detail explains the Option, Example illustrates and never prescribes, and Proposed carry-forward detail stays non-authoritative until explicitly promoted.

Why

  • The SPS defines Detail but not Proposed carry-forward detail; the added role makes explicit that candidate text acquires authority only after promotion into its owning PRD/spec/plan/task/guideline/template surface.
  • Rich media must declare which role it serves.
  • The #358 decision-egress scope was imported into AC007.

Options and consequence deltas

3B · Treat all concrete material as Detail. Simpler vocabulary, but examples and candidate specifications can appear approved. If chosen instead, readers may mistake illustration for implementation authority.

3C · Ban concrete material. Prevents false authority but weakens HDO review of architecture and makes design tradeoffs less testable.

Downstream impact · Medium

  • Promotion mechanics route to AC007 decision-egress scope; later proposal guidance/template wording gains explicit role labels.
  • Historical proposals remain point-in-time records.
  • Accepted candidate text still must be copied or transformed into an authorized downstream artifact.

Related material

AC007 · #500 #358 · imported
Largest downstream wording impact · Consultant synthesis
Non-authoritative illustrative Detail · three roles

Illustration only. These labels — Detail, Example, and Proposed carry-forward — demonstrate role marking, including for rich media; none is approved implementation material.

Detail
Explains
Evidence, tradeoff, constraint, consequence, or architecture beneath an Option.
Example / Proposed carry-forward
Illustrates / proposes
An Example never prescribes. Proposed carry-forward text stays a candidate until explicitly promoted and accepted. Rich media declares its role.
Evidence boundary
T104C-CON-007 and T104-STD-005-CLAUSE-009 keep all three roles non-authoritative until the governed disposition and any later promotion.
D4Grounding Analysis as sole content feed; HTML as HDO surfacePending
What is the default content pipeline for a direction/architecture general_proposal at CHECK000?

Recommendation

✅ 4A · Grounding Analysis is the sole SSOT content feed; the single-file HTML is the HDO disposition surface. The HTML cites rather than duplicates the Analysis, and controls export advisory input only.

Why

  • The Analysis guideline registers proposal_analysis: an Analysis feeds, but never replaces, a Proposal.
  • A direction/architecture general_proposal defaults to a grounding analysis as its sole content feed and a single-file HTML as the HDO surface.
  • AC007 owns the analysis-to-proposal pipeline leg and planned formalization; AC005 implements only a bounded interim note.

Options and consequence deltas

4B · Let the HTML carry original content. Author decision substance directly in the HTML rather than feeding it from a frozen Analysis. If chosen instead, the SSOT splits across two surfaces and the Analysis-feeds-Proposal boundary erodes.

4C · Fold the Analysis into the Proposal. Drop the separate grounding Analysis and keep only the HTML. If chosen instead, evidence and synthesis lose their durable Consultant-owned home and review traceability weakens.

Downstream impact · Medium

  • AC007 owns the pipeline skill and full cross-guideline encoding.
  • AC005 dogfoods the division now.
  • This candidate is itself the fourth family dogfood and creates no normative authority.

Related material

Analysis v2.1.0 AC007 · #500 PR · #493 Provenance
Analysis-as-SSOT default · Consultant 4A synthesis
Evidence boundary
The stabilized family dogfoods pair Consultant-owned grounding with a single-file HTML instrument, and AC005 directly dogfoods that division. This is sibling/self evidence, not authority and not a pre-made AC005 disposition.
6
Governance decision lane · GD
TK001 carrier-route disposition

One pending governance decision. Two operable choices preserve the genuine carrier tension; 5A-interim is recommended, while retire-absorbed remains a conforming alternative with a different lineage cost.

Governance lane · GD

#326 carrier treatment · 1 pending decision

D5Issue #326 carrier treatment for TK001Pending
How should the pre-freeze issue #326 carrier be treated once CHECK000 approves?

Recommendation

✅ 5A-interim · Amend issue #326 in place. After a conforming CHECK000 approval, amend #326 in place with the required P-STD-008-CLAUSE-008D changelog trail — the lowest-churn carrier treatment.

Why

  • In-place amendment with a durable changelog comment preserves the trail; retire-absorbed defers normalization to AC007. Only the HDO adjudicates the weight.
  • No #326 action is authorized before a conforming CHECK000 approval.

Options and consequence deltas

retire-absorbed · Close #326 as absorbed-unexecuted. Close #326 with a pointer to AC007/#500, leaving normalization to the proposal-family owner — a conforming alternative with a different lineage cost.

Downstream impact · High

  • Detailed activity and any conditional task contract remain in parent PLAN #325; no issue is created, amended, retired, or executed by this HTML.

Related material

PLAN · #325 #326 AC007 · #500
Genuine HDO adjudication · #325 / conditional #326
Evidence boundary
#325 remains the detailed PLAN authority; #326 stays untouched while CHECK000 is pending. P-STD-008-CLAUSE-008D requires a body edit plus a durable changelog comment for any in-place amendment.
7
Never hidden
Open residue

Only unresolved items remain here; resolved review history stays in provenance.

D5 weight

The HDO must adjudicate the weight between low-churn in-place amendment (5A-interim) and closing #326 as absorbed-unexecuted (retire-absorbed).

Ledger

After an approving merge, the acceptance-ledger comment on parent PLAN issue #325 must bind the outcome to the merge hash, commissioning PR #493, and this decision surface.

Verification

The HDO decides whether to retain/demote the existing commit-bound verification artifact with a concise v0.5/v0.6 correction addendum, or remove it from the final package; the earlier v0.4 exemplar-parity claim is corrected either way.

Routing
Downstream routing register; nothing is executed by this proposal
RouteStatusScope / boundary
AC007 · #500OwnerFull family normalization, the proposal_analysis pipeline, decision egress, and construction research.
AC008 · #501GatedGated on AC007 controls.
AC009 · #502GatedGated on AC007 controls.
#449 / #450DependencyNormative-encoding dependencies.
T104CInterimInterim design authority only.
#184 / #185 / #358CompletedCompleted / no-action for AC005.
#98OpenLegacy PRD; open until an accepted successor exists.
8
Routed input only
HDO controls and scribe payload

All five controls ship pending. Selections, alternative selections, and notes remain in memory only. “Change” requires an alternative selection. Readiness stays unset until all five decisions have a disposition; all Accept yields ready_to_carry_forward, while any Change/Other yields recycle.

Architecture lane

0 Accept · 0 Change · 0 Other · 4 pending

Governance lane

0 Accept · 0 Change · 0 Other · 1 pending

Leg 1 · MergeThe merge event is the anchoring auditable platform event.
Leg 2 · PR #493Commissioning PR #493 carries the CHECK000 control-node record, all five dispositions, evidence links, and the recorded HDO act.
Leg 3 · PLAN #325The parent PLAN issue #325 receives the merge-hash-bound acceptance-ledger comment.
Leg 4 · Decision registerThe decision-record linkage propagates the five dispositions into the drift-audit §V.A HDO register; authorized session-note linkage strengthens but does not replace the bundle.

P-STD-008-CLAUSE-005A requires all four linked legs. Copying this payload is user-initiated egress for governed scribing only; it is not any leg of the disposition record by itself.

9
Traceability
Provenance and authorization boundary

Lineage: retired Markdown cycles → WDL baseline-drift audit → adversarial rounds → v0.4.0 post-escalation rework → HDO-accepted v0.5.0 rebuild → this v0.6.0 content recycle fed by the frozen grounding Analysis v2.1.0. The review campaign and resolved history are provenance, not open residue.

MD cycles 1–3
Precommissioning
Decision substance, compared landscape, and impact deltas stabilized before retirement in place.
WDL drift audit
Reconciliation
Control mechanics, register, and the §V.A HDO decision register were reconciled.
Rounds 0 / 1
Adversarial recycle
Two review rounds surfaced instrument and carrier-route defects; HDO authorized post-ceiling remediation.
v0.5.0 → v0.6.0
Content recycle
Decision substance re-fed from the frozen grounding Analysis v2.1.0, the sole SSOT content feed, onto the accepted v0.5.0 visual baseline; no exemplar-parity claim is made.
artifacts/tasks/T104/workspace/PH001/AC005/plan_T104-PH001-AC005.md
artifacts/tasks/T104/workspace/PH001/AC005/analysis/analysis_T104-PH001-AC005-CHECK000_detail-depth-decision-grounding.md
artifacts/tasks/T104/workspace/PH001/AC005/analysis/analysis_T104-PH001-AC005_wdl-baseline-drift-audit.md §V.A
https://github.com/NMAQ1607/prompt/pull/493

Governance footnotes

  • T104-STD-005-CLAUSE-003: cite, do not absorb, other artifact families.
  • T104-STD-005-CLAUSE-009: proposal content remains non-authoritative until the governed disposition.
  • DRC remains decision-level; readiness is advisory and never authorizes execution.

Authorization boundary

This proposal amends no standard, PRD, guideline, template, issue, register, or board state, and does not activate proposal_level=detail. It is itself a general_proposal family dogfood fed solely by the frozen grounding Analysis v2.1.0 (SHA-256 60327f53…1b1ab8356); it creates no normative authority. The four-leg proof bundle on PR #493 is the only CHECK000 disposition path described here.